Post navigation

The Great Migration and Heresy in the Vatican

The following interview from TV Libertés discusses the heresy — without ever using the word — of Pope Francis as expressed in his official writings about the Great Migration into Europe.

Many thanks to Ava Lon for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Video transcript:

00:04

TV Libertés presents

00:16

a program of

00:20

Jean Pierre Maugendre

00:24

and Guillaume de Thieulloy

00:36

Mission Lands

00:44

Dear friends, good morning. Welcome to the Mission Lands,

00:48

a Sunday religious program, on September 3rd 2017,

00:52

thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost.

00:56

There are three parts in this program: first a conversation with Laurent Dandrieu, a journalist,

01:00

author of ‘The Church and Immigration, Great Malaise’

01:04

about the recent declaration by Pope Francis on the occasion of

01:08

the National Migrant and Refugee Day on August 21st.

01:12

Then Reynald Secher, a historian who was the creator

01:16

of the stand-alone ‘Homme Nouveau’ [New Man] about the Church in Turmoil,

01:20

of the ‘War of Vendée’, and the third part a meeting with

01:24

father Bertrand Labouche , the author of ‘Fatima the Message for our Time’,

01:28

on the occasion of the pilgrimage of the Sacerdotal Fraternity of

01:32

Saint Pius X to Fatima on August 19 and 20.

01:44

Universal Church

01:49

Good morning, Laurent Dendrieu —Good morning.

01:53

Thank you for joining us. So at the beginning of this year

01:57

you published a book which is already somewhat famous:

02:01

‘Church and Immigration, Great Malaise’; and Providence allows that

02:05

that Pope Francis is giving a new actuality to this text in

02:09

the message that he published at the occasion of the World Migrant and Refugee

02:13

Day. First of all, what is this World Migrant and Refugee Day?

02:17

Well, the World Migrant and Refugee Day goes back to Benedict XV,

02:21

so the beginning of the twentieth century, and it’s a day

02:25

that was traditionally organised at the diocesan level. Every diocese

02:29

could choose the date of its own Day, and

02:33

in 2004 John Paul II made it a world day and fixed a common date,

02:37

common for the entire Church, which is one of the last

02:41

Sundays of January, but several months in advance.

02:45

Since 1980, well, the popes

02:49

have published a message to prepare this day, to somewhat fix

02:53

the main lines, and this is what Pope Francis did a couple of months ahead

02:57

with that message for the Migrant Day — 2018. —Voilà,

03:01

which will be held in January. —Yes, I don’t know the exact day anymore, but it’s in January.

03:05

Voilà, well what is the message of the Holy Father?

03:09

What is there, inside this document, which was summarized, which he himself condensed

03:13

to four verbs: to welcome, to protect, to promote, and to integrate?

03:17

What is there, inside this text? — Well, unfortunately, one could say that

03:21

this is a sort of COMPENDIUM OF ALL THE NONSENSE THAT IT IS POSSIBLE

03:25

TO PROFFER ABOUT THIS SUBJECT. It doesn’t make me happy, but

03:29

it deserves some clarification. And by the way, many people, in defense of the

03:34

the statements by Pope Francis since the beginning of his pontificate, were saying that it was a

03:38

it was a purely evangelical discourse, that it was only about extolling charity,

03:42

and that the pope was completely within his role in holding this discourse.

03:46

But we can see very well with this discourse that it’s about

03:50

a totally political message, since we counted no fewer than 21

03:54

concrete political measures that the pope is advocating for countries.

03:58

So indeed four times in this message;

04:02

first of all “welcome” means exactly

04:06

to broaden even more the possibilities of legal entry

04:10

of migrants into their destination countries,

04:14

and — with a principal that is rather stupefying for

04:18

anyone who understands two or three basic notions of traditional political philosophy —

04:22

meaning that the pope is suggesting that

04:26

in the name of the principal (value) of the centrality of the human person,

04:30

the security of the migrants has to — always and systematically — come

04:34

before national security. The problem is that we don’t understand very well that opposition

04:38

between personal and national security, because

04:42

we don’t see clearly what might very well be that ‘personal security’,

04:46

which may exist outside the legal, judicial and political frames

04:50

that would [normally] act to protect it.

04:54

Therefore there is no possibility for the existence of personal security WITHOUT national security.

04:58

Second, national security is of course… and personal security

05:02

is of course also the security of the populations of the welcoming countries,

05:06

the countries of destination. However, those populations are, yet again,

05:10

the Great Absent from the message, which is dedicated

05:15

strictly to the well-being of the migrants. —So is this story,

05:19

is this affirmation also an ultimate negation of any social life of

05:23

any political organization? If my personal interest is above that

05:27

of national security, I don’t know why I would let my skin be punctured [by bullets]

05:31

to defend my country, my family and so on. —It’s obvious, what is very striking

05:35

in this text, that there is a total absence of reflection and

05:39

consideration of the common good. Meaning that indeed men have to aim for good,

05:43

but do so by going through the natural communities

05:47

that have to teach them the good; it’s the traditional doctrine

05:51

of the Church, and it supposes, in fact, the first condition

05:55

for the good of men is that this common good

05:59

be preserved and protected. And here we are under impression

06:03

that it is being totally sacrificed to the personal well-being

06:07

of the migrants. So there is in fact a negation — in this text —

06:11

of the basic principles of politics and the very principles of citizenship.

06:15

And especially in the second point of this message,

06:19

which is under the motto of the verb: “to protect”

06:23

where the pope takes a stand for a number of concrete laws

06:27

for the migrants, independently… —For example? —“Independent,” he says,

06:31

“of their migratory status”. Which means that he is reaffirming those rights

06:35

as much for the illegals as for the legal immigrants. And this

06:39

aligns with others — he is very explicit there —

06:43

a right to free circulation in the welcoming country, access to the job market, to social security,

06:51

to retirement funds, to the health system, to family reunification,

06:55

for which he gives a very expanded definition, since it’s not only

07:00

wife and children, but also brothers and sisters and grandmothers, perhaps cousins. Voilà.

07:05

So, the pope is demanding with this text

07:11

a pre-emptive right to install the illegals

07:16

in the welcoming country, for whom we know very well that right

07:20

would make their potential deportation totally impossible, because starting from the moment

07:25

when the children go to school, for example, well, even if the request for asylum is refused,

07:29

the deportation becomes totally illusory.

07:36

The theme of the following point is “to promote”: promote the dignity

07:40

of the migrant — So the third point! —Voilà, and especially

07:44

on this occasion, the pope reaffirms

07:48

the right of migrants to their religious identity.

07:52

So this is also a blank check given for

07:56

the Islamization of Europe, more precisely, since we know very well

08:00

that today the majority of those migrants who arrive in droves

08:04

are Muslims. —And the last one

08:08

is “to integrate”. Integrate the migrants, and this

08:12

is unfortunately a reminder of the constant doctrine

08:16

of the Church on those questions, since the Church for

08:20

about 60 years has been systematically condemning everything resembling

08:24

a policy of assimilation. So you have to integrate,

08:28

but all while respecting the cultures of origin of the migrants.

08:32

And we can see very well what exactly the results of that are today

08:36

in multicultural societies. Those multicultural societies which, by the way,

08:40

Pope Francis is blessing in a way all through his text.

08:44

And so how does he define “integration”, if it cannot be assimilation?

08:49

Well, there an extremely interesting sentence in that message. He says: “It’s about

08:53

a longitudinal process that has as its goal the creation of societies and cultures.”

08:57

Which means that in fact immigration HAS TO TRANSFORM European societies and cultures.

09:01

It’s not that immigration has to adapt to European societies and cultures, but

09:05

melt in them to give birth to a new society to a new culture

09:09

and a NEW HUMANITY. So Pope Francis is explicitly,

09:13

through this discourse, asking us to sacrifice who we are and our own

09:17

culture, our own identity. —So what is the degree of authority of a text

09:21

such as this one? —It is weak. We know that that there are different levels

09:25

of authority in the discourse of the Church; I have a chapter dedicated to it

09:29

in my book. At the top, there are obviously questions

09:33

of faith, questions of dogmas, and at the lowest level

09:37

there are questions that handle — in one way or another — politics,

09:41

and there — I think we just demonstrated it — we are right in the middle of those questions,

09:45

and so the level of authority of a text like this one,

09:49

is only to ask the faithful to listen to him loyally, to try to

09:53

understand him and to try to agree with him

09:57

if possible, but if this is impossible well, the faithful

10:01

retain the total freedom to not only be in disagreement,

10:05

but even to make this disagreement public and to call out the Church

10:09

about those questions. There is an article in Canon Law

10:13

about those questions that is crystal clear.

10:17

So yes, we have right to call out the Church, with, of course,

10:21

all due respect for ecclesiastical authority. — Well, precisely

10:25

what were the reactions to the publication of the text?

10:29

Well, they were — I think we can call them — AGHAST.

10:32

You are being invaded by other peoples, who will progresively dominate you in number and completely change your culture, your convictions, your values…” His Excellency Cardinal Sarah, November 8th 2016

10:33

Indeed, this is a test that caused a lot of commotion and consternation

10:37

not only among Catholics, but

10:42

also beyond, because indeed

10:46

the question for the Catholics is this:

10:50

Is the fact of being Catholic suddenly preventing us from exercising

10:54

our duties as citizens? Since concretely, as citizens, we have the duty

10:58

to work to preserve civilization,

11:02

the society to which we belong; and so apparently this text

11:06

seems to ask us to give that up;

11:10

and then beyond that, because I think this text,

11:14

this type of text is the reason for a huge scandal

11:18

for non-Christian Europeans, who

11:22

have a totally legitimate worry as well

11:26

about preserving their civilization and their identity, and have the feeling, I think justifiably,

11:31

that the Church became the main force of collaboration

11:38

in what the pope himself defines as a “migratory invasion”,

11:42

and that the Church is indeed telling them: “Listen, we want

11:46

to convert you, we want you to become Catholics, but above all, first,

11:50

you have to give up your identity and your legitimate

11:54

worry about survival.” So it seems to me that these types of intervention,

11:58

like this one by Pope Francis, are absolutely dramatically

12:02

widening the divide already separating the European peoples from

12:06

the Catholic Church. —So in your opinion there is a real risk that

12:10

ethnic Europeans, attached to their identity,

12:14

might develop a hostile reaction towards the Church.

12:18

Well, a friend of mine sent me a text from a representative [a politician]:

12:22

“I admit to you that I am aghast, and I no longer feel like going to a Church

12:26

that is committing suicide before our very eyes. Even from this side

12:30

we are being betrayed.” So in your opinion there is a real risk that Europeans

12:34

who are attached to their identity will generate an “antichristianism” because of

12:39

this standpoint. —It seems to me absolutely obvious. I would say

12:43

that the program that John Paul II arranged for Europe

12:47

was the New Evangelization: meaning to re-evangelize

12:51

European populations that have broken away from the faith of their ancestors,

12:55

from the faith of their fathers. Which is called —

12:59

and it’s obvious that the first circles to be re-evangelized, what we call

13:03

the ‘cultural Catholics’, people who have historical ties or ties of memory to Christianity,

13:07

but no more than that. Well, those people, how do you want to evangelize them,

13:11

all while explaining them that, by the way, the first thing they have to do

13:15

is to give up their identity and their worry about survival

13:19

and the protection of their civilization? This is absolutely impossible.

13:23

We are indeed in the process of organizing a divorce between

13:27

the Church and European societies. —Thank you, my dear friend.

13:31

Do you have any meetings to suggest to our viewers?

13:35

Of course independent of your book: ‘The Church and Immigration

13:39

the Great Malaise: the Pope and the Suicide of the European Civilization’

One of the best analyses I have ever read on the subject. We know that Pope Benedict was kicked upstairs, but he never resigned. So the idiot Francis is actually an anti-Pope. I hope God deals with him accordingly. May I suggest the bump on his head was far too light.

This pompous Communist will tear down the already tottering Church more thoroughly than any ISIS barbarian!

John Paul 2, the Koran-kisser that he was, was pale in comparison to this disgusting anti-pope bergoglio.
This New Church has been spewing a love for Islam since the diabolical Vatican 2. Of course they want us to be ashamed of our cultures, our societies, our Anglo appearances. They want us neutered and zombied and un-catechized so we can’t or won’t recognize this beast of an anti-Christ, the sect of muhammed ([redacted]).

This Pope is either the last Pope that Nostradamus mentioned, or -even worse- an early personification and direct predecessor of the Anti-Christ that he warned us about.
This usurper, while pretending to be representing Christianity, is executing the plan of Satan by pressing us Europeans into make a painful and impossible choice between our historic roots, ethnic identity and civil duties on the one hand, and our Christian beliefs and morality on the other.
It’s important to understand that the essence of Christianity is not to be found anymore in these corrupted big churches, the Roman Catholic one being not the only one, just the worse one due to its shere size and tremendous power. Christianity is only to be found within ourselves and between individual citizens, through gatherings of small groups of truely believing Christians.
It’s important to observe that good and necessary ideals and traditions often get usurped and corrupted by evil forces, because this is the easiest way for them to seize power over our us.
The Jesuits (predecesor to this Pope) corrupted Christianity before, the Jacobins of the French Revolution corrupted the idea of Freedom and Equality, Communism corrupted the idea of Equality and Justice, Nazism corrupted our love for our precious traditions and home countries, Big Money corrupts te idealf of Freedom, and the EU corrupts the ideal of necessary inter-European coopreation through it’s evil bureaucracy in Brussels, which, by the way, is structured in a very similar way to the Catholic Church and the (by then corrupted and decadent) Old Roman Empire in its latest years.

He follows the free masonry philantropic utopiah of humanism: the salvation of human bodies (with all their efforts of humanitarian aids to save children of africa), not in the salvation of the souls (contrary to Christ who said there is no salvation on this earth).

He is part of the establishment and always repeats the same mainstream ideology of multiculturalism, socialism, and lastly climate naturalism.

I tend to look at events in terms of genetics and social organization.

So, obviously, genetics doesn’t apply to an international organization like the Catholic Church..or does it?

Can you really have an international, religious organization? Religion seems to be a reinforcement of a cohesive community; once you have a diverse (globalist) community with no common elements except money and power, a religious organization such as the Catholic Church takes on, it seems to me, the characteristics of this globalist identity. You see exactly the same phenomenon in the Mormon Church, by the way, which sees its future in Latin America and Africa rather than the US, and thus brings the Mormon Church squarely on the side of open borders and globalist policies.

Looking at the Catholic Church debacle, it seems to me the nail in the coffin was bringing in a Pope from Latin America who didn’t even share the European heritage of the church. I realize that being European, or even strictly Italian, as were most historical Popes, is no guarantee of nationalist or exclusive policies.

Without knowing much of the matter, I would offer a guess that the Russian Orthodox church serves its constituency much better than the Catholic Church does now. Although by no means limited to being in Russia, the Russian Orthodox church is nevertheless rooted in a national culture and history.

The claim of the Catholic Church is universal truth which applies to all man. The more we know of man, however, the more we know that differences are built into the genes of different nationalities ( as long as they will exist as distinct groups) which may disallow the possibility of a universal truth in the sense that the Catholic Church wishes to teach. At a minimum, the doctrines and politics of the church ought to be set by a smaller, more homogeneous group, and groups in other regions may identify and adhere, or they may not, but my suggestion would be, they would not have a voice in the determination of those policies.

Again, it is death to try to reconcile doctrine and policy to genetically different groups. It can, however, present a cohesive doctrine which will be followed by self-selected subgroups not necessarily European, who are ready (genetically) to adhere to the doctrine.

As an atheist, I would like to see the Catholic Church succeed as a glue of Western culture, but as a follower of logic, I do not see how it can do so in the light of a claim to universal representation of all people, however different.